PDA

View Full Version : Trouble in Steeler Country



forfreelin04
01-27-2008, 06:32 PM
Ben Roethlisberger likes tall guys; Hines Ward no longer likes Ben Roethlisberger
By MJD

Friday, Jan 25, 2008 12:35 pm EST
Ben Roethlisberger recently expressed a desire for the Steelers to acquire a tall receiver, which, at least to me, doesn't sound like an unreasonable request. As it turns out, though, it made Hines Ward so mad that he's vowed to never again taste Big Ben's Beef Jerky.

In Ben's defense, he didn't make the request in any kind of a way that was disparaging to the Steelers current receivers. In fact, he went out of his way to make the point that he liked them:

"I'm always going to ask for a tall receiver," Roethlisberger said in an interview with the Post-Gazette. "That's just me. Our receivers are unbelievable, but our tallest guy might be Hines. Or Santonio [Holmes]. Hines is going to say he's 6 foot, but he's 5-11."

That doesn't sound so inflammatory. But here are some of the things that Hines told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in response:

"I don't hear Tom Brady or Peyton Manning asking for that."

"I don't know, whatever he says. I have no idea. To me, it's a rare combination of receivers out there who are good and tall. We won a Super Bowl, we didn't have a tall receiver then. I don't see Tom Brady caring about who's tall or not. He got Randy this year, but he did it before without him.''

"To me, I have enough problems to worry about than what Ben wants -- I can't give him the contract. He wants a tall receiver? Why did we draft Santonio [Holmes]?"

Uh-oh ... someone's got a little man complex. That seems like a gross overreaction to an innocuous statement about a preference for a receiver with some height.

I'll say this for Ben, too: When he did play alongside Plaxico Burress with the Steelers, Plax made a ton of plays for him. Any time Ben got in trouble, he'd scramble, and it seemed like he always ended up looking for Plax downfield. They made a lot of plays that way.

Not that I don't enjoy the public sniping, but I think Hines is just going to have to get over this one. I think it's obvious, judging from the number of times that Rothelisberger throws Ward's way, that Roethlisberger likes him and thinks he's a good receiver.

So Ben likes tall guys ... so what? that doesn't mean you aren't special in your own way, Hines. It's not you, it's Ben. It's about what he's going through right now. At this point in his life, he just wants to be with someone who doesn't have to sit on seven phone books to be able to drive. I'm sure you two can still be friends.



*Hines,

I agree with you. How dare Big Ben make such horrible attackes against your lack of height! I think you should opt out of your contract and play in the NFC. That way you don't have to tear up the Bengals defense twice a season.

Hope you find a nice home in the NFC,

Forfreelin04

Bip Roberts
01-27-2008, 06:36 PM
Both seem like cry babies to me.

NorrisHopper30
01-27-2008, 08:04 PM
Both seem like cry babies to me.

That's because they are cry babies.

Bip Roberts
01-27-2008, 08:07 PM
That's because they are cry babies.

:eek:

WVRed
01-27-2008, 11:28 PM
At first I thought this was a legitimate request, but he does have a receiver that is 6'5.

Problem is, he is a tight end.

If the Bengals didn't have Henry, i'd have no problem with Carson making similar comments. A tall receiver, whether it be a tight end, is going to give you a tall red zone target and whether the receivers like it or not, its going to help the team overall in the long run.

I think Hines is worried that a taller receiver may cut into his stats.

Bip Roberts
01-28-2008, 01:10 AM
Ward should come out and say something similar

macro
01-28-2008, 01:12 AM
http://www.post-gazette.com/images3/20050124DSsteelershines_450.jpg

sonny
01-28-2008, 05:01 AM
http://www.post-gazette.com/images3/20050124DSsteelershines_450.jpg

There's no crying in football.

SteelSD
01-28-2008, 10:54 AM
At first I thought this was a legitimate request, but he does have a receiver that is 6'5.

Problem is, he is a tight end.

If the Bengals didn't have Henry, i'd have no problem with Carson making similar comments. A tall receiver, whether it be a tight end, is going to give you a tall red zone target and whether the receivers like it or not, its going to help the team overall in the long run.

I think Hines is worried that a taller receiver may cut into his stats.

If Ward spent any time worrying about his stats, he wouldn't still be a Steeler because at this point he's sacrificed a bunch of yards and touchdowns by staying with one of the most run-oriented teams in recent history.

And I do agree with the article's writer about Ward blowing it a bit out of proportion, although he's likely just standing up for his guys. Ben's just lobbying for what he considers to be the missing piece. He did love having Plax as an option and lobbied for the Steelers to re-sign him before he left for the Giants.

Ben has the tough possession guy in Hines, speed out of the slot in Holmes, and a big target in Heath Miller for the middle of the field. I think what he wants is a big wideout who can create some separation, catch the ball when thrown high (a good number of Ben's INT's come off tipped passes thrown high), and give Pitt a better red-zone fade option. Lastly, a taller guy is much easier to see in space while being pressured and the Steelers' offensive line allows that far too often.

Honestly, I have no issue with Ben's request. It'd make life a lot easier for the guy. And if this ends up being the big controversy for the offseason while other teams have to deal with criminal behavior, drugs, etc. from their players, then I'll feel pretty lucky.

Bip Roberts
01-28-2008, 10:58 AM
He should be more worried about getting Parker back because with out the play action hes terrible.

SteelSD
01-28-2008, 12:12 PM
He should be more worried about getting Parker back because with out the play action hes terrible.

Give me a break. It's quite obvious that you haven't seen Roethlisberger run the no-huddle or come through in any number of situations where the defense knows that the pass is coming. Play-action helps any QB for sure, but to suggest that Ben is "terrible" without it is entirely without merit.

Bip Roberts
01-28-2008, 12:38 PM
He did great with out a running game against the jags

SteelSD
01-28-2008, 12:59 PM
He did great with out a running game against the jags

Bad first half for sure. Forcing throws is never good. But let's just forget that Roethlisberger actually rallied the Steelers to a one-point lead late in the second half without a running game and while everyone in the stadium knew the pass was coming.

But hey, if we dislike the Steelers, I guess one half of one football game is all the evidence we need to support our mind, which is already completely made up. Super!

Bip Roberts
01-28-2008, 01:19 PM
Bad first half for sure. Forcing throws is never good. But let's just forget that Roethlisberger actually rallied the Steelers to a one-point lead late in the second half without a running game and while everyone in the stadium knew the pass was coming.

But hey, if we dislike the Steelers, I guess one half of one football game is all the evidence we need to support our mind, which is already completely made up. Super!

The Jags started to play terrible prevent D that 2nd half. They didnt want the Steelers to make big plays so they allowed the the short stuff to work.

When the running game isnt working Ben ends up having to force passes and often makes mistakes. Its the nature of his style more than anything id say. Favre and Romo do the same things and rely on the play action a lot more than other QBs.

The other side of the story is when guys like Brady, Manning and Palmer get rushed and the pocket shrinks they start making mistakes because they arent as elusive.


Yes I exaggerated when I said he was terrible

Dom Heffner
01-28-2008, 03:33 PM
I don't know Bengals fans, sounds like there's some sour grapes going on.

After the season- heck, the history of the franchise- we've had I feel awful piling on anybody, even the Steelers.

Roethlisberger proved to me this year he's the real deal, and though Palmer might be the more talented QB, he certainly had the better season.

camisadelgolf
01-28-2008, 04:53 PM
I can't believe no one's mentioned this yet: His name is Whines Hard.

wheels
01-28-2008, 07:22 PM
Seriously.

As much as I hate to admit it, Ben's a terrific QB.

I'm the first to pile on the Steelers and Ben's inablility to use more than one syllable, but a guy's got to be GOOD in the first place if he's going to draw the ire of rival fans.

We don't like him because he's good, not because he's bad.

As for Hines, he ought to thank his lucky stars that it's been Roethlisberger throwing to him over the past few years as opposed to Charlie Batch and the like.

WMR
01-28-2008, 07:26 PM
I'll never be magnanimous where the Squealers are concerned. It just isn't in my DNA.

Screw Whines Hard.

Screw Ben Rothlessbooger.

Screw the Squealers.

Fin.

Yachtzee
01-28-2008, 07:39 PM
Seriously.

As much as I hate to admit it, Ben's a terrific QB.

I'm the first to pile on the Steelers and Ben's inablility to use more than one syllable, but a guy's got to be GOOD in the first place if he's going to draw the ire of rival fans.

We don't like him because he's good, not because he's bad.

As for Hines, he ought to thank his lucky stars that it's been Roethlisberger throwing to him over the past few years as opposed to Charlie Batch and the like.

I think Ben Roethlisberger made a misstep when he talked about his wishes for a bigger receiver in public. As a team leader, he needs to be careful what he says. The way he said what he said implies that his current crop of receivers is not sufficient for his needs. Regardless of whether you feel that's true or not, that's something best kept between Ben and the coaching staff/front office.

I think Hines Ward should be thankful that he's not dealing with Bubby Brister or Kordell Stewart. However, his reaction isn't entirely unexpected. WRs are notorious for big egos and big egos are often easily bruised.

I don't have a problem with Roethlisberger from a talent perspective. He just gets on my nerves when he makes every injury out to be the worst thing that could happen to a guy. The whole thing with his thumb a few years ago was right up there with Bubby Brister's mom as far as most annoying Steelers' items picked up on by the media.

GAC
01-28-2008, 10:16 PM
I have no problem with fans "hating" a rival team/player. That's the nature of sports. It's competition. But many seem to do it devoid of the truth/facts, and what that team (players) have accomplished throughout their history to the present. Scoff all one wants. ;)

I'm a Browns fan who obviously is no Steelers fan. But I'm also not afraid to acknowledge that jealousy is also a factor when it comes to the history/success of the Steelers organization, and what the Rooney family have historically accomplished.

I wish the Browns and Bengals "family" of ownership had followed the same paths.

I still find it hilarious that when Hines Ward publically says something he's labeled "Whines Hard". But when Chad Johnson does so, he's unappreciated and misunderstood. ;)

Bip Roberts
01-28-2008, 11:46 PM
I think thats just how you interpret it.

traderumor
01-29-2008, 10:13 AM
I have no problem with fans "hating" a rival team/player. That's the nature of sports. It's competition. But many seem to do it devoid of the truth/facts, and what that team (players) have accomplished throughout their history to the present. Scoff all one wants. ;)

I'm a Browns fan who obviously is no Steelers fan. But I'm also not afraid to acknowledge that jealousy is also a factor when it comes to the history/success of the Steelers organization, and what the Rooney family have historically accomplished.

I wish the Browns and Bengals "family" of ownership had followed the same paths.

I still find it hilarious that when Hines Ward publically says something he's labeled "Whines Hard". But when Chad Johnson does so, he's unappreciated and misunderstood. ;)That's your gig, we let you be our resident Chad Hater, plus it is hard to do something so clever with his name :p:

GAC
01-29-2008, 09:45 PM
That's your gig, we let you be our resident Chad Hater, plus it is hard to do something so clever with his name :p:

I guess every forum has to have one. But I'm obviously not the only one. See the thread on Chad's Comments On Playing For The Dolphins. :lol:

But "hate" is such as strong word tr. I don't hate the guy. Just think he's immature and has an ego that is no different then many of the big mouth receivers, such as Ward, that we see scattered around the league. I've never advocated that Chad be traded. Just wish he'd grow up and not think so much of himself.

Look at this current example. This thread was started to try and imply there is trouble in Steeler country and that Hines Ward no longer likes Ben because Ben said that he'd like to have a taller receiver. And HW didn't care for it. Big deal.

It means no more then when Chad is giving his QB crap over on the sideline. Does that mean Chad doesn't like Carson or there is trouble in Bengal country? ;)

WMR
01-29-2008, 09:50 PM
Clearly, crybaby Chad will be happier with the inimitable Cleo Lemon throwing him passes instead of the likes of Carson Palmer. Stupid.

SteelSD
01-29-2008, 11:55 PM
I think Ben Roethlisberger made a misstep when he talked about his wishes for a bigger receiver in public. As a team leader, he needs to be careful what he says. The way he said what he said implies that his current crop of receivers is not sufficient for his needs. Regardless of whether you feel that's true or not, that's something best kept between Ben and the coaching staff/front office.

Or maybe Ben already tried the private route when the Steelers let Plaxico Burress walk, and then figured it didn't work. And he certainly didn't "imply" that the current receiver corps wasn't adequate, even though he'd be correct if he did. Ward is getting older. Nate Washington isn't answer. Holmes is a good slot guy and Heath Miller is a solid TE, but Ben has been doing more with less for quite some time now.


I think Hines Ward should be thankful that he's not dealing with Bubby Brister or Kordell Stewart. However, his reaction isn't entirely unexpected. WRs are notorious for big egos and big egos are often easily bruised.

Ward has virtually zero ego. The guy is one of the last true football players on the planet and I'm honored that I've been able to watch him perform over the years. If Ward was doing anything, it was simply standing up for the guys who've run the routes with him recently.


I don't have a problem with Roethlisberger from a talent perspective. He just gets on my nerves when he makes every injury out to be the worst thing that could happen to a guy. The whole thing with his thumb a few years ago was right up there with Bubby Brister's mom as far as most annoying Steelers' items picked up on by the media.

Roethisberger has gone through a lot more physical issues than you might realize. Knee, ankle, shoulder, ribs, etc. He takes a pounding and says nothing about the routine stuff that would normally sideline your average QB for at least a game or two. Ben does not play up injuries at all. I have a lot of respect for that. If folks are blowing injuries out of whack, that's the media simply taking something and running with it.

And if he was asked what he wants and named a "tall receiver", that actually shows a lot of character as he likely should have said, "An entirely different offensive line." He's been sacked nearly 100 times over the past two seasons; leading to many of the injuries you don't hear him talk about.

Cedric
01-30-2008, 06:09 AM
And if he was asked what he wants and named a "tall receiver", that actually shows a lot of character as he likely should have said, "An entirely different offensive line." He's been sacked nearly 100 times over the past two seasons; leading to many of the injuries you don't hear him talk about.

He holds onto the ball a LONG time. That's his game and it's going to cause him to take sacks he shouldn't. It also is going to allow him to make plays that other Qb's couldn't. Ben isn't exactly the best at going through progressions and quickly making decisions. If he 3 step drops and gets rid of the ball it's usually to a clearly intended WR or a back. That said you know way more about the Steelers Oline than I do. I suppose that the struggles there haven't helped with a player that already hates to give up on plays. Was there major injuries this year? I honestly don't remember.

GAC
01-30-2008, 09:51 AM
Ben didn't switch to QB until his senior year in high school. Before that he was (guess what?)........ a wide receiver. So at 6" 5" and 241 lbs, maybe he should become that tall receiver he craves? :lol:


People can say what they want about Ben - I remember when similar things were said about another Steeler QB named Bradshaw - but in his 4 years in the NFL, he has an overall QB Rating of 92.5 (2007 was his best at 104.1), he threw for 32 TDs in '07 (another career high), and has taken his team to the post-season three of those four years ('04, 05, 07), and they won a Super Bowl in 2005. He struggled with injury in the '06 season, and IMO the motorcycle accident prior to the season contributed to that.

Yes, in that Super Bowl, Ben had the lowest rating for a Super Bowl winning QB; but I still don't think it overshadows what this guy has accomplished in his young career to date.

Bip Roberts
01-30-2008, 11:58 AM
Won the worst officiated super bowl ever if I might add.

The D has taken him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

SteelSD
01-30-2008, 01:23 PM
Was there major injuries this year? I honestly don't remember.

Ben played the final Jags game with a bum ankle (from the St. Louis turf-fest) and a hurting shoulder. That's the extent of the issues we actually knew about.

I'm not suggesting that's the reason he played poorly in the first half of the Jags game; only that he didn't "play up" either of those issues in the slightest.

SteelSD
01-30-2008, 01:26 PM
Won the worst officiated super bowl ever if I might add.

The D has taken him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

First, the only call the officials actually got wrong that went the Steelers' way was the personal foul against the Seattle QB.

Secondly, Roethisberger set Steeler records this season offensively. The defense was very overrated this year and their numbers were bolstered by a pretty soft schedule to start off the year and a couple games played in muck. By the end of the season, the Steelers were generating no pass rush and they gave up big plays in bunches.

Ben did more than his part in 2008.

Bip Roberts
01-30-2008, 01:40 PM
Ben did have a good year ill agree there.

GAC
01-30-2008, 10:31 PM
Won the worst officiated super bowl ever if I might add.

That's your subjective opinion.


The D has taken him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

No one denies they've had solid defenses; but to allude that the defense alone was the reason they go to the post-season is just another way to take a side-handed swipe at Ben and Pitt offense. Check the stats. One still has to score to win. How many of those TDs/points scored did the D make in comparison to the offense during those playoffs?

Bip Roberts
01-30-2008, 10:36 PM
That's your subjective opinion.



No one denies they've had solid defense; but to allude that the defense alone was the reason they go to the post-season is just another way to take a side-handed swipe at Ben. One still has to score to win. How many of those TDs/points scored did the D make in comparison to the offense during those playoffs?

I'm pretty sure my subjective opinion is held by a large majority of football fans.

Of course Ben is involved in the teams wins but so was Trent Dilfer when Baltimore won the SB. Most people would suggest he isnt all that good. Ben isnt a bad QB but with out the Steeler D he probably doesnt win as many games as he has. If anything I say Willie Parker is a bigger key for them than Ben has been.

SteelSD
01-31-2008, 03:02 AM
I'm pretty sure my subjective opinion is held by a large majority of football fans.

That's nothing more than the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum. The reality is that a bunch of people can believe a really dumb thing without that dumb thing being reality.


Of course Ben is involved in the teams wins but so was Trent Dilfer when Baltimore won the SB. Most people would suggest he isnt all that good. Ben isnt a bad QB but with out the Steeler D he probably doesnt win as many games as he has. If anything I say Willie Parker is a bigger key for them than Ben has been.

I was waiting for the inevitable ridiculous Trent Dilfer citing. Feel free to cite the seasons Dilfer produced at least 2,300 yards passing with a rating of 98.00 or higher. Good luck on that. Then let's ignore that the Steelers lost exactly one game he started prior to Parker becoming the featured back.

Seriously, a 25-year-old QB already has a Super Bowl ring and has set Steelers passing records while leading his team to the playoffs in 75% of the seasons he's played while also producing a QB rating of 98.00 or higher three times in those four seasons.

But let's forget that an just attribute the team's success to anything and everything other than a really good QB. Your obvious bias is preventing you from seeing what's right in front of your face.

Bip Roberts
01-31-2008, 03:24 AM
Bias? I said he a good QB but the fact is a lot of QBs could be good with the running game hes had and the fact that his D tends to get him leads and all he has to do is keep the clock moving and hand the ball off.

For as much as you want to quote his regular season QB rating you skip completely over his 79.2 QB raiting in the playoffs.

Fact is any QB in the history of football would have won a SB ring with how that D was playing. He proved that when he was flat out awful during it.

Hes lost 1 game before Parker became the running back. Man who was the RB before Parker? Man I cant remember his name. Shame on me I guess he wasn't that good anyways. :rolleyes: When Parker took over it made that running game even better. Lets not be silly here there is a reason Ben doesnt throw so many passes.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-31-2008, 04:21 PM
I know several Steeler fans and they all can't stand Willie Parker.

They think he's an overrated softie. They say he's the definition of a system back and if you gave Najeh Davenport the same amount of carries and he'll rush for just as many yards and more TD's.

Felix Jones or Mendenhall would be good picks for the Steelers in the 1st. If Willie were a better receiver, he'd be a perfect change of pace or 3rd down back.

GAC
01-31-2008, 08:58 PM
but the fact is a lot of QBs could be good with the running game hes had

Sure, the running game sets up the passing game. Basic NFL 101. Simply ridiculous to charge that the reason Ben is a good QB is solely because of their running game.


and the fact that his D tends to get him leads and all he has to do is keep the clock moving and hand the ball off.

Ben had a career high 32 TD passes in '07. 9 TDs came via running the ball.


Fact is any QB in the history of football would have won a SB ring with how that D was playing. He proved that when he was flat out awful during it.

Fran Tarkenton didn't. ;)


Lets not be silly here there is a reason Ben doesnt throw so many passes.

Pittsburgh threw the ball 63.8% of the time (9th in the NFL), and was 2nd with a QB Rating of 99.9%.

No, maybe they aren't "pass happy" or over-dependent on the pass, like some teams have to do due to a lack of a consistent running game, because Pitt has balance on the offensiive side. That's what teams strive for.

Bip Roberts
01-31-2008, 09:28 PM
How many times do i have to say it. BEN IS A GOOD QB. I think thats the 3rd time now ive said it.

Come on Ben until the last couple of years threw like 16 attempts per game. He threw barely over 400 times this season. 15 NFL QBs were a head of him. Dont give me that 15 other NFL teams are just pass happy or over-dependent. 2 of those QBs didnt even play full seasons. Heck he threw only 22 passes more than the passing inept Vince Young.

The Steelers were 3rd in rushing attempts and 31st in passing attempts... with 442 passing attempts and 511 rushing attempts. Thats not really 63.8% of the time. I think you were reading completion percentage.

Ben greatly benefits from having a good D, and a running game that allows him to run out the clock. He is a good QB dont get me wrong at all but the system has a lot more to do with his success than you are willing to admit.

GAC
02-01-2008, 08:34 AM
Come on Ben until the last couple of years threw like 16 attempts per game.

2004 - 21 attempts/game
2005 - 22 attempts/game
2006 - 31 attempts/game
2007 - 27 attempts/game

That's an average of 25 attempts/game over that 4 year span.


He threw barely over 400 times this season. 15 NFL QBs were a head of him.

So you're evaluating a QB by the number of attempts made per game/season? It sure seems that is where you are placing the "burden" of your argument. A very ineffective way. QBs are normally drafted to work within a designed system for that particular organization. No one, including myself, has denied that the Steelers aren't a run-oriented team.

I rate a QB at their efficiency within that system. And other then the 2006 season which was marred by a motorcycle accident, ruptured appendix, and subsequent injury, Ben has been one of the most efficient.


Dont give me that 15 other NFL teams are just pass happy or over-dependent.

Never stated or alluded to that. Those are your words (assumption). Only that there are teams in the NFL whose QBs were forced to pass more because of the unreliability/inconsistency of their running game. Teams like New Orleans, Green Bay, Cincinnati, and Seattle for example.

Bip Roberts
02-01-2008, 11:50 AM
2004 - 21 attempts/game
2005 - 22 attempts/game
2006 - 31 attempts/game
2007 - 27 attempts/game

That's an average of 25 attempts/game over that 4 year span.



So you're evaluating a QB by the number of attempts made per game/season? It sure seems that is where you are placing the "burden" of your argument. A very ineffective way. QBs are normally drafted to work within a designed system for that particular organization. No one, including myself, has denied that the Steelers aren't a run-oriented team.

I rate a QB at their efficiency within that system. And other then the 2006 season which was marred by a motorcycle accident, ruptured appendix, and subsequent injury, Ben has been one of the most efficient.



Never stated or alluded to that. Those are your words (assumption). Only that there are teams in the NFL whose QBs were forced to pass more because of the unreliability/inconsistency of their running game. Teams like New Orleans, Green Bay, Cincinnati, and Seattle for example.

You tried to say that the Steelers pass the ball almost 63% of the time. You are back tracking off that statement of other teams are just pass happy or just overly dependent. You have tried to say they are a balanced offense when its clearly not the case, although they did try to be more balanced last year than previous years.

I dont even know what point you are prove with trying to combine stats in some attempt to I guess say he passes more than 16 times on a yearly basis.

Even if you wanted to do that they still are one of the least passing teams in the league, and my whole argument all along has been that Ben is the least important part of that team. His performance has less to do with the SB and the winning of his team than you are for some reason willing to admit.

SteelSD
02-01-2008, 01:08 PM
Bias? I said he a good QB but the fact is a lot of QBs could be good with the running game hes had and the fact that his D tends to get him leads and all he has to do is keep the clock moving and hand the ball off.

Cripes. Pittsburgh has put up historically great defenses since the Steel Curtain prior to Roethlisberger and they won nothing. Not with Bubby Brister. Not with Neil O'Donnell. Not with Kordell Stewart.

The Steelers have trotted out defenses that were MUCH better than what Roethlisberger has seen and yet the only Pitt QB since Bradshaw who has a ring is Big Ben.


For as much as you want to quote his regular season QB rating you skip completely over his 79.2 QB raiting in the playoffs.

Fact is any QB in the history of football would have won a SB ring with how that D was playing. He proved that when he was flat out awful during it.

That's pure hyperbole.

Roethlisberger's playoff QB rating in 2005 was 101.7. Even with a rough Super Bowl. That rating led all 2005 playoff QB's, BTW, ad it includes a 148.7 rating versus the Bengals, a 95.7 against the Colts, and a 124.9 rating in the AFC championship game. The Steelers don't even make it to the Super Bowl in 2005 without a QB capable of putting up high-level performances against winning teams, yet you act like any schmo could have done it.


Hes lost 1 game before Parker became the running back. Man who was the RB before Parker? Man I cant remember his name. Shame on me I guess he wasn't that good anyways. :rolleyes: When Parker took over it made that running game even better. Lets not be silly here there is a reason Ben doesnt throw so many passes.

You dramatically overrate Willie Parker. Because Parker's game is "boom or bust", that guy leaves the Steelers in a LOT of second-and-long and third-and-long situations. Tack on the fact that Ben got sacked more than anyone not named Kitna, and you might figure out that Roethlisberger is a guy who has to take a lot of chances and he has to be efficient and effective when doing so. In fact, Roethlisberger led the NFL in 1st Down percentage while being placed in a ton of long-yardage situations where everyone in the stadium knows the pass is coming.

At this point, you're just arguing to argue.

Bip Roberts
02-01-2008, 01:24 PM
Yea im not saying Ben is as bad as the guys you named. Hes good enough to keep them going and fits the team much better than those other guys.

They won nothing since the Steel Curtain? Do you mean they just didnt win SBs or were they flat out terrible? Hmm...


Does winning a SB makes you automatically better than anyone who hasnt won a SB?

GAC
02-01-2008, 02:56 PM
You are back tracking off that statement of other teams are just pass happy or just overly dependent.

Not back tracking at all. That is simply how you chose to read something into it that wasn't there.... that every QB above Ben in Pass Attempts was "pass happy". Those were your words (and assumption), not mine. And I think I clarified that in my previous post.


I dont even know what point you are prove with trying to combine stats in some attempt to I guess say he passes more than 16 times on a yearly basis.

Not combining stats. I got mine from NFL.com. Really not hard to look up. Very straightforward and to the point. Over his career as QB, he's averaged 25 pass attempts a game. That's a huge difference from the 16 you gave. Where did you get that from?

But again - the number of pass attempts is not a very reliable and accurate method of evaluating a QB.


and my whole argument all along has been that Ben is the least important part of that team


His performance has less to do with the SB and the winning of his team than you are for some reason willing to admit.

And listening to your logic, all they really need is a guy standing back there handing the ball off and staying out of the way. :lol:

It's really hard to get a feel on your position when you call the guy a terrible QB, then retract it and say you exaggerated - then say he's a GOOD QB (3-4 times), but then every subsequent statement that follows contradicts that. Now he's the least important part of the team?

More exaggeration?


Does winning a SB makes you automatically better than anyone who hasnt won a SB?

It does in most people's book. Or are you now going to contend that Pitt got lucky in '05? When you go on a run, and defeat the quality teams that Pitt did in '05, there's more then luck involved.

BuckeyeRedleg
02-01-2008, 03:18 PM
The Giants run this year is very similar. That is, if they can seal the deal and knock off the Pats.

Bip Roberts
02-01-2008, 04:21 PM
No, maybe they aren't "pass happy" or over-dependent on the pass, like some teams have to do due to a lack of a consistent running game, because Pitt has balance on the offensiive side. That's what teams strive for.

How can I read this wrong, or how can you say that I'm just making it up that you said it?

Your response to me saying until the last couple of years he was throwing like 16 attempts per game is to combine 4 years of stats and then say that its well more than 16? :rolleyes:

Yes I surely did exaggerate when I called him terrible. He is a good QB, hes better than what the Steelers have had for years. He would start on a heck of a lot of NFL teams, but with out a doubt the running game, and the defense is the main reason they steelers are having success. Please try to explain to me why the Steelers run the ball so many more times than they throw it if it wasn't the case.


Pitt did get lucky in 05, not to say they werent good because they obviously were. They weren't the best team in the NFL but just like most playoffs the hottest team normally pulls through.

Winning the SB or not winning a SB doesnt change the talent level of the QB.

GAC
02-01-2008, 10:08 PM
How can I read this wrong, or how can you say that I'm just making it up that you said it?

Because you've been real good at reading what people say wrong or inserting huge assumptions.

I said this.....


No, maybe they aren't "pass happy" or over-dependent on the pass, like some teams have to do due to a lack of a consistent running game, because Pitt has balance on the offensiive side. That's what teams strive for.

Notice the emphasis on "some". Where did I say (as you did below) that every QB ahead of him is therefore pass happy? Again, a huge leap on your part and not what I was saying. I specifically stated that SOME teams were dependent upon their passing game because they lacked, or could not establish, a consistent running game. They were therefore forced to be more dependent on the run. Other teams just passed more because they do. That's their system. All are different.


He threw barely over 400 times this season. 15 NFL QBs were a head of him. Dont give me that 15 other NFL teams are just pass happy or over-dependent.




Your response to me saying until the last couple of years he was throwing like 16 attempts per game is to combine 4 years of stats and then say that its well more than 16? :rolleyes:

Go back and look it up yourself.

Ben has only been in the league 4 years! :lol:

individual years.....

2004 - 22.4 PA/game
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2004&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Find

2005 - 23.7 PA/game
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2005&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Find

2006 - 32.7 PA/game
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2006&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Find

2007 - 27.6 PA/game
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2007&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Find

Do the simple math. Actually, because I rounded the numbers off earlier, over his 4 year career, Ben averages 26.6 PA's/game.

Where did you get the 16 PAs/game at again?


Please try to explain to me why the Steelers run the ball so many more times than they throw it if it wasn't the case.

First off - I was wrong when I said that Pitt passed the ball 63.8%. I read the wrong column. My mistake. But I have already acknowledged that Pitt is a run-oriented team.

In 2007, Pitt made 27.6 passing attempts/game and 31.9 rushing attempts/game. You're talking a disparity of a little over 4 attempts in difference. They passed for 3,071 yards, and rushed for 2,168 yards. That is what I meant when I contend they have offensive balance, or at least strive for it better then alot of teams.

SteelSD
02-02-2008, 01:20 AM
Yea im not saying Ben is as bad as the guys you named. Hes good enough to keep them going and fits the team much better than those other guys.

Yeah. Just "good enough to keep them going". Give me a break.


They won nothing since the Steel Curtain? Do you mean they just didnt win SBs or were they flat out terrible? Hmm...

If you don't win Super Bowls then you've won nothing. My point holds. The Steelers have had far better defenses prior to Roethlisberger's tenure, yet they weren't able to take that next step to a ring until some kid joined the fray and became the youngest QB to ever win a Super Bowl. Along the way, he produced an excellent passer rating of 98.6 (third in the NFL) during the regular season and even including a poor Super Bowl performance, he led the NFL in postseason QB rating.

Even this year, Pittsburgh's defense was porous versus good teams. The Special Teams' play was atrocious (and cost them many games, including the Jax playoff game). The offensive line was bad in pass protection. Yet, despite all that, Roethisberger set Steelers passing records and led the team to the playoffs. He performed poorly in the first half of the Jax playoff game, but then led the team back to a lead in the final minutes of the second half. And the vaunted defense you give so much credit to gave the game away. Again. Like so many times during the 2007 season.

Roethisberger, almost by sheer will alone, got that team to the playoffs and almost won that playoff game against a better team. Yet, according to you he's just a spare part that can easily be replaced because the rest of the team is just pure awesomeness. It's quite obvious that you don't have the first clue about who the Steelers were this season and you have yet to address any relevant point I've made about the challenges Roethisberger has faced.


Does winning a SB makes you automatically better than anyone who hasnt won a SB?

That's a ridiculous question and an attempt at a strawman at the same time. You'll have to excuse me for not positioning Ben Roethisberger as a better QB than Dan Marino. Anything else left in your bag of tricks that I can quite easily debunk?

Bip Roberts
02-02-2008, 03:42 AM
Some NFL teams are pass happy.. That would mean, at least to me, that its a couple. A couple isnt 15 other QBs.


I honestly am tired of arguing, You guys win Ben is the quite possibly the best QB in the NFL and with out him the steelers would be flat out awful barely winnings 4 games a year.

:rolleyes:

Im sorry I cant argue against 2 people who say almost the opposite things.


Where did I say hes a spare part? Quit putting words in my mouth. I said hes a good QB, its just the running game and the D are much more important to their success than his QB play.

GAC
02-02-2008, 10:27 AM
Some NFL teams are pass happy.

Yep. That's what I said..... SOME are.


That would mean, at least to me, that its a couple.

Since when does "some" mean only a couple? It could be three or four, or five or six.

some[suhm; unstressed suhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm]: an unspecified number, amount, etc., as distinguished from the rest.


A couple isnt 15 other QBs.

I'm glad you finally figured that out. You were the one who threw out the 15 other QB figure. ;)


Quit putting words in my mouth.

You had no problem putting them in mine.


I said hes a good QB, its just the running game and the D are much more important to their success than his QB play.

And all we've asked you to do is show some evidence to back that claim up. And you haven't yet.

Bip Roberts
02-02-2008, 12:20 PM
Yep. That's what I said..... SOME are.



Since when does "some" mean only a couple? It could be three or four, or five or six.

some[suhm; unstressed suhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm]: an unspecified number, amount, etc., as distinguished from the rest.



I'm glad you finally figured that out. You were the one who threw out the 15 other QB figure. ;)



You had no problem putting them in mine.



And all we've asked you to do is show some evidence to back that claim up. And you haven't yet.

A couple, a few, some. My point was to say that you said some are pass happy and to me that doesn't mean a large number of them. When you pass for on average a couple or so more attempts per game than the Vince young you will find it hard to convince me that it just happens to be a lot of pass happy teams out there.

Ive said plenty of facts, unlike you mine are actually correct.

GAC
02-02-2008, 09:03 PM
A couple, a few, some. My point was to say that you said some are pass happy and to me that doesn't mean a large number of them.

What does it matter how many there are? Why is it so significant to you to have to assign some exact number in this instance?

You can continue to assign any numerical amount to "some" all you want, because all it proves is that my original point either went way over your head.... that the reason some teams have more pass attempts then others, like a Cincy, GB, N.O, Seattle, is because of the lack or mediocracy in their running game. Why you're having a hard time grasping that is beyond me. Yet you continue to wander off on these tangents.

or

You make statements and throw things out there, knowing full well it's only your subjective bias, and that you have no intention of ever trying to back them up with facts or substance, because as Steel stated - you just like to argue. :lol:


When you pass for on average a couple or so more attempts per game than the Vince young you will find it hard to convince me that it just happens to be a lot of pass happy teams out there.

That's because you're under the delusion that guys like Young (and Ben) didn't throw much during a game.

How many pass attempts per game did Vince Young average this year? The answer? 25.5. Ben? 26.9

Again - where did that 16 you gave come from?

What is the NFL league average on pass attempts/game? 26.4

Here, do the math..... http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jsessionid=E02CA09CD1F48ABFD9E9BBBAB E163BF9?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_ATTEMPTS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Find&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

I did. ;)



Ive said plenty of facts, unlike you mine are actually correct.

No. Face it. The bottomline is - you can't stand Ben Roethlisberger because he plays for a dreaded and hated division rival. A division rival that has pretty much dominated the rest within the division for quite some time (for the most part). And it eats at fans like you. So you feel you must somehow degrade the guy, because he is the opposition, by fabricating and making comments such as he's the "least important part of that team" (which is such a laughable statement), as well as other "facts", based solely on that premise alone.

And every time the statistical evidence refutes your claims, and I've provided you with links to back that up....you try to change the subject or twist the words of those countering you. ;)

Bip Roberts
02-04-2008, 01:45 AM
How the heck do you get the league average is 26.4 when the last team in the league threw it 27.0 pass attempts per game. :bowrofl:

Just more wrong stats from you.

If you could read I never said exactly 16 attempts per game. I also it only included the 1st to years in the league.

You havent proved a single stat of mine wrong and you havent shown me a stat that was correct. :bowrofl:

GAC
02-04-2008, 10:15 PM
How the heck do you get the league average is 26.4 when the last team in the league threw it 27.0 pass attempts per game.

You obviously didn't open the link I provided above, which is the NFL's official site... http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jsessionid=E02CA09CD1F48ABFD9E9BBBAB E163BF9?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_ATTEMPTS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Find&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

Because if you did, then anyone could plainly see - because it's right before your eyes - that the least amount of PAs/game attempted by a QB was Boller (22.9). The most was by Drew Brees (40.8)

But it's quite simple. First off - a QB has to have at least 14 PAs/game to qualify. It's not about who individually had the most, or who had the least. You do know how to calculate what "league average" is don't you? Obviously not.


If you could read I never said exactly 16 attempts per game. I also it only included the 1st to years in the league.


Come on Ben until the last couple of years threw like 16 attempts per game.

It doesn't matter if you said exactly 16, like 16, or somewhere around 16. You were wrong. :lol:

Why didn't you just take the time, like I did, and look the numbers up, instead of pulling one out of thin air?

So spin away. This "debate" has ended for me because it's gone as far as it can. You're obviously too stubborn or prideful, when faced with straightforward and simple numbers that anyone can reference, to admit you are wrong. There's nothing left to prove (or disprove).

Bip Roberts
02-04-2008, 10:17 PM
You obviously didn't open the link I provided above, which is the NFL's oficial site... http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jsessionid=E02CA09CD1F48ABFD9E9BBBAB E163BF9?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_ATTEMPTS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Find&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

Because if you did, then anyone could plainly see - because it's right before your eyes - that the least amount of PAs/game attempted by a QB was Boller (22.9). The most was by Drew Brees (40.8)

But it's quite simple. First off - a QB has to have at least 14 PAs/game to qualify. It's not about who individually had the most, or who had the least. You do know how to calculate what "league average" is don't you? Obviously not.





It doesn't matter if you said exactly 16, like 16, or somewhere around 16. You were wrong. :lol:

Why didn't you just take the time, like I did, and look the numbers up, instead of pulling one out of thin air?

So spin away. This "debate" has ended for me because it's gone as far as it can. You're obviously too stubborn or prideful, when faced with straightforward and simple numbers that anyone can reference, to admit you are wrong. There's nothing left to prove (or disprove).

You do know that Boller wasnt a starter and in games that he started he averaged 30 attempts per game right? Also just to further prove your wrong its *To qualify for passer rating, the player must have thrown at least 14 passes/game. You might want to read your own links and stop giving me wrong stat after wrong stat.

Any thing else you want to be proven wrong on?

I said like 16, i didnt say it was exact it actually was more like 20 but yea I was really far off